Good source of "both sides" news

[desecration]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

I like to see the issue from multiple perspectives, and this site does a good job of getting past the talking points of the day to the actual arguments. They post a list of politics links everyday, about half from conservative and half from liberal news, and they seem to find the best editorial and analysis writing on the internet.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

I like the RealClear Polls, but I do not rely on them.

 

[desecration]

I like the RealClear Polls, but I do not rely on them.

I am skeptical of polls in general. I like Pew and a few others but one has to take them with a grain of salt.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Most polls seem to be MostlyCloudy . . . .

 

[ll74]

The site is great for a stepping off point to more in depth discussion. I think most people use it at a glance and therefore don't get a much value as they could from it.

 

[desecration]

I agree. It's a good place to read like a newspaper: one article after another. They do a good job of finding links that get around most paywalls too.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

I am skeptical of polls in general. I like Pew and a few others but one has to take them with a grain of salt.

I am greatly skeptical of polls.

You can only poll the willing...

 

[JoePepsiCo]

Most polls seem to be MostlyCloudy . . . .

Which is the view outside of my open windows.

 

[desecration]

I am greatly skeptical of polls.

You can only poll the willing...

True, and it's bad science: user-reported data is the least relaible. Ask someone what they think about something, and they answer how they think their friends think they should think about it. Humans are monkeys at heart.
There's also the problem that asking 1300 Americans about an issue filters for those willing to answer polls, and is not in any way representative of the country in general. This is one reason why the 2016 polls were so wrong; the other is that they were designed to be wrong so they could be used to manipulate others.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Which is the view outside of my open windows.

Which comes from polling teh st000pids.

 

[ll74]

I am skeptical of polls in general. I like Pew and a few others but one has to take them with a grain of salt.

Most people also don't take the time to see the methodology and just accept the ones they like. Two polls can be identical in high level headlines but completely different in methodology and actual meaning. It's fun to hear people break them down and discuss them. I'm a huge fan of podcasts that discuss polls in depth.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

True, and it's bad science: user-reported data is the least relaible. Ask someone what they think about something, and they answer how they think their friends think they should think about it. Humans are monkeys at heart.
There's also the problem that asking 1300 Americans about an issue filters for those willing to answer polls, and is not in any way representative of the country in general. This is one reason why the 2016 polls were so wrong; the other is that they were designed to be wrong so they could be used to manipulate others.

Well documented phenomenon, but not friends as much as the interviewer...

I don't even pick up the phone unless I know the calling number.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

Which comes from polling teh st000pids.

That must be why I never get polled.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

That must be why I never get polled.

Me, either. Besides, I wouldn't consent to sit still for such inane shit.

 

[wizzard426]

It's the poles that I find obstructive

 

[JoePepsiCo]

There's a good Pole joke from the 70s in there somewhere...

 

[desecration]

Well documented phenomenon, but not friends as much as the interviewer...

Probably both, if The Bonfire of the Vanities can be believed. The other factor is in the framing of questions. The polls I have taken always give me options that do not reflect my actual opinion, so I must pick the closest match, which often is very far from my meaning.

For example, once I told someone that I opposed prayer in schools because I thought people should be encouraged to have family prayer time at home (like most of humanity does, by the way, just to different religions). There was no spot for that on her checklist, so she grouped me in with the communists, atheists, eggheads, and suit 'n tie guys.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

I didn't read that one. I sort of stick to non-fiction.

We used to recite the Lord's Prayer every single school day right after the Pledge of Allegiance.

I still came out an Atheist, but I did join the military. The recruiter played a mean joke on me and put me down as being a Southern Baptist when I told him that I was a non-believer...

 

[JoePepsiCo]

Lit's dB software needs an improved RLOCK().

 

[desecration]

The recruiter played a mean joke on me and put me down as being a Southern Baptist when I told him that I was a non-believer...

LOL. What's the old joke? "Why don't Baptists have sex while standing up? They are afraid people might think they are dancing."

 

[JoePepsiCo]

*chuckle*

I suffered more than one fried chicken and watermelon joke in boot...

 

[desecration]

The only time I hear fried chicken and watermelon jokes around here, they are told in Spanish.

 

[desecration]

Lit's dB software needs an improved RLOCK().

I wonder. It seems like threads lose sight of each other or there is an issue with verification via cookies. I guess I could dig into the code, but Python is not my favorite. I don't dislike it, just have never seen the point (might as well go to C* at that point).

 

[JoePepsiCo]

I stopped programming long ago. I kept my hand in it until the machines changed to dedicated OS platforms.

I hated C in all its formats. I like structure.

 

[desecration]

I hated C in all its formats. I like structure.

I can't speak for all of its formats, but for me, I like C/C++ because I like structure. Then again, sometimes it pays to think like a microchip. I am indifferent to most of the new languages although I am curious about Go. They all look like C-LISP hybrids to me.